DIADES

On 6/15/2021 at 11:58 PM, N-L-M said:

but none have reached FUE or IOC milestones yet.

Yes, really the question I was asking - pretty sure it is "contracted" for Australia too - is it in service anywhere?

On 6/15/2021 at 11:55 PM, Ramlaen said:

adopting it for their CV90

but not in service or even proto testing yet

18 hours ago, Rico said:

NATO is still using a lot of them

OK, was automatically thinking MBT

9 hours ago, Kal said:

Hanwha will be demonstrating 2 turrets for Land 400 phase 3 RMA.

Yeah, read that.  Can't see how.  RMA is well and truly underway.  Pretty sure the rules do not allow late entries!  More likely that there is one turret type on their RMA vehicles (Elbit for sure) and they will show the CoA the "EOS" turret on the sidelines.

On 6/3/2021 at 8:31 PM, blindidiot said:

40mm CTA

Why bother?  Anybody but the French using the stuff?

On 6/12/2021 at 4:25 AM, Rico said:

Leo 1

Really???  Leopard 1??

On 6/11/2021 at 12:16 PM, StarshipDirect said:

Iron Fist

Dud.  Has anybody taken Iron Fist into service?  Lots of "trials" but no contracts?

On 6/9/2021 at 6:41 PM, 2805662 said:

is the audible signature a requirement?

Yes - two Requirements FPS 2250 and 3381.  Static and in motion.  Non-detectable at 300m and 3,000m respectively.  Then there are crew/dismount habitability Requirements too.

Yes - AJAX is a valuable reminder.  In that case, given how old the vehicle is and that it is in service - I suspect the limits we accept now are lower than the bad old days!

On 6/10/2021 at 8:44 PM, 2805662 said:

That’s the turrets for the Block 2 Boxers. No Iron Fist for turrets fitted to the Block 1 Boxers. 
Nothing official, but indications that the level of maturity was not as high as anticipated when being subjected to the normal battery of engineering reviews (PDR, CDR,  V&V etc). 

From what I hear, that is a fair assessment. 

Separate issue - Iron Fist is turning into a massive cluster.  It will not enter Australian service - period.

34 minutes ago, 2805662 said:

Yes…already addressed:

 

 

I don't agree.  That is pure show stuff.  If that was an actual functional system, why not fitted to RMA vehicles?  Plus, just look at it - the geometry means that there is almost certainly massive back pressure as the poor exhaust is basically pointed at a flat plate a few inches away.  OK, maybe I'm wrong about that and lets pretend that the exhaust is now flowing in that thing - which is now a massive thermal signature right down the side of the vehicle.  The vehicles as delivered are breathtakingly loud and I can't imagine Hanwha not fitting a solution if they had one ready to go.

Great solar shield cammo - pity about the bloody great exhaust pipe sticking out of the from right corner....

On 6/7/2021 at 1:32 AM, Ramlaen said:

weight margin

Depends on which APS?  Pretty big range of mass I think?

On 6/6/2021 at 6:25 PM, SH_MM said:

APS suited for the Stryker with the Rafael Trophy VPS and the Rheinmetall StrikeShield

Interesting.  No Iron Fist?

On 6/3/2021 at 7:03 PM, holoween said:

sources you can share

sorry no.  From conversations

22 hours ago, SH_MM said:

cadence issues

still not solved.  A very real problem in a technical sense.  Definitely impacting burst grouping.

22 hours ago, SH_MM said:

The immature state of the Puma at its adoption would have make it a perfect fit for the British Army

Nice, really made me chuckle!

On 6/1/2021 at 9:27 PM, 2805662 said:

coat rack

looks like it might t be useful too - unlike the balcony on the back of Redback

16 hours ago, SH_MM said:

So much "hate" between them

Three powerful forces.  Love Hate and cold hard cash.  Cash wins always.    In this case, french cash.  There was/is real hatred tho I am told a recent death in the family is seen as likely to improve the relationship

12 hours ago, SH_MM said:

Aside of the budget issues

and the reliability issues, the spares issues, the accuracy and cadence issues, the stall during pivot turn issues. yeah.

13 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

Drummond is neither senile or a lunatic, he is a salesman and 'influencer' paid to promote a product.

Agreed - for KMW.  For those outside Germany.  KWM and Rheinmetall hate each other.  Expect no truth from one commenting on the other.

14 hours ago, David Moyes said:

Rheinmetall pushing a British-ised Lance turret.

Yes.  Given that there is a LANCE turreted module already (AUS) and that it looks like Germany will adopt it to, then RBSL (Rheinmetall Baes) will definitely offer that.  Surely it is obvious to all (except the ancient foe) that CTA is a dead end?  A solution without a problem?

7 hours ago, 2805662 said:

rumoured problems with the Lance turret

Yes, what problems?  Supporting evidence?  And no, the Ajax turret is not lance based anyway.

32 minutes ago, 2805662 said:

ditch them

How?  elbit own the turret IP and that is the turret being assessed during RMA.

1 minute ago, 2805662 said:

Land 121, Land 400-2

Yep - but the difference is that 121 and 400 Ph2 are in contract so changes to BMS will be ccp.  Paid work.  Hanwha are faced with having a key partner on the shit list.

So, Hanwha are looking unlucky.  Elbit as a partner probably looked like a good idea a few years ago.  Now a definite liability.

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/update-australia-removing-elbit-software-from-armys-battle-management-system